TexasCHLforum.com

JP171 wrote:

equin wrote:I do like the latter part of the petition's proposal seeking more transparency in a politician's financial stake. I know there are already measures in place under the ethical rules for politicians to abide by, though.

Even so, I don't mind if our leaders in Congress, the Executive and the Judicial Branch earn a decent salary. After all, CEO's and other corporate officers earn high salaries for making the tough decisions they need to make for multi-million dollar companies. I want the best, smartest, talented, dedicated and hardworking people to do the same for our country's sake.

You're not going to find that talent and drive unless they're compensated well. You'll also be able to keep them more HONEST, not less, if you compensate them well. Otherwise, you'll find those who will be more likely to abuse their authority in the form of bribery and corruption if they're not compensated well. That is how it was with Spain when it was once a global power. Mexico and many of the other Latin American countries followed Spain's model and are now suffering the consequences with rampant corruption and bribery. That is not what I want for our country.

With that said, however, I think adding a few extra provisions to the Constitution may make the politically necessary decisions more fair and transparent:

1. TERM LIMITS for all, not just the President. Congress and the Judiciary, including the lower courts, should have their service limited, but not so much that we would then suffer from inexperience. Their needs to be a balance, and the limits should be staggered.

2. RECALL members of Congress. There is no mechanism to recall or "impeach" a member of Congress by their representatives. Such a provision would have to have some protections, though, so as not to abuse the recall/impeach by political foes, such as an overwhelming majority (2/3, 3/4?) vote to do so.

Really?? the you slight all Military Persons that died for your right to spew stuff.

Congress should be housed in barracks, fed and paid on the same schedule the Military is. there are available rooms right over the road in Quantico that would be just grand for them. the bad checks that are covered, the staff and so on and so forth should go away. there is no reason that Congress cretins get paid the ammount they get for the work they do, go back to a stipend to cover losses and get rid on the free healthcare for them and families go to the same healthcare military members get make them pay for it just like the soldiers do. as far as being honest that isn't going to happen because they know there is no accountability to anyone. oh yea they might get voted out of office, hmm so what, many congress cretins are long term people. term limit, yes 2 terms then yer gone fer good. no re-do's ever. no pension ever. judges should always be subject to recall by the people not like the supreme court, they are there till they die or quit because as we know impeachment isn't anykind of real threat look at Mr WJ Clinton, he was impeached and was guilty as sin, but yep he walked right on out without anything not even a by your leave, found not guilty even though his lie was blatant and recorded on every news network in the world. BAH!!! just get rid of all of em and start overfrom the top down

I'm sorry, I've considered politics, but even I'm not going to do it for Military pay, barracks or food. I grew up with that....did it for 18 years, not doing it again. I'll stick with researching my new business. (so, now how many others you going to lose?)

I'm all for them making a good income, when they do the job they we're sent there to do! So right now I think $0.00 sounds about right. This whole whitehouse.gov thing is a joke, I havn't seen one response to anything other then a beer recipe and a rant on gun control(which he responded to pretty quickly if I do say so).

You guys realize the pay raise was $900/yr and is on the chopping block in the deal proposed by senate, going to the house right?

I agree that those salaries are quite high, but the $900 pay raise is small potatoes compared to the entitlements and gross waste in foodstamps, unemployment, disability, medicare, and other dole out programs. Run the numbers and you'll see too many folks getting paid out that didn't pay in.

gigag04 wrote:You guys realize the pay raise was $900/yr and is on the chopping block in the deal proposed by senate, going to the house right?

I agree that those salaries are quite high, but the $900 pay raise is small potatoes compared to the entitlements and gross waste in foodstamps, unemployment, disability, medicare, and other dole out programs. Run the numbers and you'll see too many folks getting paid out that didn't pay in.

Anyone who's managed a checkbook knows that the "little things add up".

APynckel wrote:

gigag04 wrote:You guys realize the pay raise was $900/yr and is on the chopping block in the deal proposed by senate, going to the house right?

I agree that those salaries are quite high, but the $900 pay raise is small potatoes compared to the entitlements and gross waste in foodstamps, unemployment, disability, medicare, and other dole out programs. Run the numbers and you'll see too many folks getting paid out that didn't pay in.

Anyone who's managed a checkbook knows that the "little things add up".

Sure - but at least the money was going to working Americans....

gigag04 wrote:Sure - but at least the money was going to working Americans....

Who already have enough income and wealth to manage multi million dollar campaigns.

The only 'mandate' I'm interested in supporting is the return to the Constitution.

I have long argued that members of congress should be employees of the states they represent, with their salaries and expenses paid by those states. They are, after all, representing their home states in DC. States should also have control of the nature of their appointments, such as term limits.

JP171 wrote:
You're not going to find that talent and drive unless they're compensated well. Really?? the you slight all Military Persons that died for your right to spew stuff.

Not sure how my statement above is a slight against Military persons, for whom I have the utmost regard and respect. But if it can be misconstrued that way, then I apologize, for that was not my intent.

However, since you brought up the military, I also sincerely believe that most military personnel are woefully underpaid for the work they do. I have even contacted Congress about that in the past urging an INCREASE in military pay, and I say this having never had the honor of serving myself (tried to get in, but was rejected back in the 90's during the Clinton Administration downsizing). To put this in perspective and still try to remain on the topic of Capitol leader salaries, did you know that the maximum salary cap for government contractors (not military personnel or civilian employees, but private contractors for the government) was raised to a whopping $723K per year?! Here is the source for that claim:

http://www.federaltimes.com/article/201 ... tives-more" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's outrageous! I have nothing against people getting rich and earning their fair share, but not at taxpayer expense for government work. Not even our top Generals, Senators, Supreme Court Justices, or the Commander-in-Chief earn anywhere near as much. Not surprisingly, attempts to lower the salary cap in last year's National Defense Authorization Act were unsuccessful.

But to address your suggestion that Congress be housed at the barracks at Quantico, you need to understand that members of Congress are not given a housing stipend, meaning they must pay their own rent while in Washington. To be offered free housing owned and paid for by the public taxpayer (no matter whether nice or spartan) would probably be a conflict of interest and a misuse of government property. Even if they were to pay rent for it, assuming the military is even authorized to charge Congress members for rent, it could still raise a conflict of interest. It raises the risk of Quantico turning those barracks to as posh and upscale as possible since Congress is who appropriates defense funds to the military. And if you're the Quantico base commander, you're going to want to make sure you keep those controlling the purse strings as happy with you as possible.

Contrary to what some folks believe, many members of Congress don't live in posh, upscale condos or luxury homes in D.C. - a few do, but most of those upscale pads are all taken up by the many fat-cat lobbyists. Many in Congress do, however, have nice upscale homes in their own districts back home since the majority of them probably do fall within that 1% of the top income earners. Here's an article on some representatives who actually sleep in their own offices:

http://www.federaltimes.com/article/201 ... tives-more" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Not sure if that's a misuse of government property, but that's a whole other issue. I'm not trying to defend Congressional members nor do I vilify them, as I think their job is much tougher than we all think it is. I just think the focus on improving our system of government should be guided elsewhere, such as with term limits for instance.

APynckel wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Sure - but at least the money was going to working Americans....

Who already have enough income and wealth to manage multi million dollar campaigns.

Where is this idea of "enough" income coming from?

gigag04 wrote:

APynckel wrote:

gigag04 wrote:Sure - but at least the money was going to working Americans....

Who already have enough income and wealth to manage multi million dollar campaigns.

Where is this idea of "enough" income coming from?

I normally ignore petitions.

I am the number 3 signer on this one...and I posted it to my FB account.

I see absolutely no reason why "Citizen" Congressmen and Senators should be paid extraordinary amounts of money and entitlements. I also believe that they should serve at the most 2 terms.
I believe that they should be provided transportation to and from Washington DC and a second residence there.
I think that they should effectively be part-time employees.

I would never in my wildest dreams consider members of the House and Senate to be the equivalent of a CEO. All I have to do is look at Nancy Pelosi, Diane Feinstein and Sheila Jackson Lee to know that they are not of that caliber.
For those that are of said aptitude and disposition, they should consider their elected positions as a duty to the country and not as a source of perks and entitlements.